Complete HarpWeek Explanation:For most of the campaign, both political parties ran as far away from the issues
as they could. Republicans "waved the bloody shirt" and warned of the
lack of political experience of Winfield Hancock, the Democratic presidential
nominee. Meanwhile, Democrats waged a war of character assassination against
James Garfield, the Republican presidential nominee. (See the 1880 Overview to this website for more details.)

That situation changed in early September when a Democratic-Fusion candidate won
the Maine gubernatorial election. Senator James Blaine of Maine convinced
Garfield to have the Republican party put aside the "bloody shirt" and
focus on the tariff issue. A month later, Hancock played into their hands by giving an
interview to the Paterson, New Jersey, Daily Guardian (published October 8), in
which he called the tariff question a local issue. Overjoyed Republicans now had
what seemed like a glaring example of the Democratic presidential nominee's
political ignorance and naïveté, and on just the issue that the Republicans
wanted to emphasize.

In reality, Hancock was trying to avoid discussion of tariff policy by saying
that the electorate should decide the contentious issue by voting for
congressional candidates who supported their position. It was a stance taken by
other politicians, including, as Democratic leaders eagerly pointed out,
Congressman Garfield. The Republicans, however, were able to exploit Hancock's
gaffe effectively, making him an object of ridicule, as in this Harper's Weekly
cover by Thomas Nast published (November 3) at the end of the campaign.

In this cartoon, Hancock (right) leans toward Senator Theodore Fitz Randolph of
New Jersey, inquiring "Who is Tariff, and why is he for revenue only?"
Although both parties were split on the issue, the Democratic platform of 1880
had endorsed a tariff policy that was aimed only at generating revenue for the
federal government, and would thus be lower than the current rates. The
Republican party, on the other hand, was beginning to emerge more clearly as the
party of protectionism. Under such a policy, tariff rates would be so high that
they not only raised revenue but discouraged the purchase of foreign goods,
thereby allegedly "protecting" American business and industry from
international competition. Here, though, Hancock is completely befuddled,
assuming that Tariff is a person and not knowing to what purpose the man would
be promoting revenue. Randolph, who represented the state where the offending
interview was given, had sought clarification on Hancock's position after it
appeared in the paper.